ASHR vs. KWEB
ASHR (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF) and KWEB (KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF) are both China Equities funds - ASHR tracks the CSI 300 Index while KWEB tracks the CSI Overseas China Internet Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ASHR returned 5.96%/yr vs -0.57%/yr for KWEB. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ASHR charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for KWEB.
Performance
ASHR vs. KWEB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ASHR achieves a 9.77% return, which is significantly higher than KWEB's -28.08% return. Over the past 10 years, ASHR has outperformed KWEB with an annualized return of 5.96%, while KWEB has yielded a comparatively lower -0.57% annualized return.
ASHR
- 1D
- -3.32%
- 1M
- 2.01%
- YTD
- 9.77%
- 6M
- 10.21%
- 1Y
- 37.51%
- 3Y*
- 12.76%
- 5Y*
- -0.54%
- 10Y*
- 5.96%
KWEB
- 1D
- -2.24%
- 1M
- -8.99%
- YTD
- -28.08%
- 6M
- -29.18%
- 1Y
- -22.79%
- 3Y*
- 0.71%
- 5Y*
- -15.81%
- 10Y*
- -0.57%
ASHR vs. KWEB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF | 9.77% | 27.02% | 11.95% | -12.52% | -27.52% | -1.57% | 36.29% | 36.50% | -28.45% | 33.47% |
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF | -28.08% | 23.55% | 12.01% | -9.06% | -17.24% | -49.01% | 58.23% | 29.92% | -33.80% | 69.73% |
Correlation
The correlation between ASHR and KWEB is 0.60, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.63 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2013 | 0.59 |
The correlation between ASHR and KWEB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.
ASHR vs. KWEB - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ASHR
KWEB
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Utilities
-
Energy
-
Communication Services
Real Estate
Technology
ASHR
KWEB
Financial Services
ASHR
KWEB
Industrials
ASHR
KWEB
Basic Materials
ASHR
KWEB
-
Consumer Defensive
ASHR
KWEB
Consumer Cyclical
ASHR
KWEB
Healthcare
ASHR
KWEB
Utilities
ASHR
KWEB
-
Energy
ASHR
KWEB
-
Communication Services
ASHR
KWEB
Real Estate
ASHR
KWEB
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
ASHR vs. KWEB — Risk / Return Rank
ASHR
KWEB
ASHR vs. KWEB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF (ASHR) and KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| ASHR | KWEB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.95 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +4.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 0.87 | +0.50 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.90 | -0.58 | +5.48 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.20 | -1.22 | +15.42 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ASHR vs. KWEB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ASHR drawdown since its inception was -51.30%, smaller than the maximum KWEB drawdown of -80.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASHR and KWEB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ASHR | KWEB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.30% | -80.92% | +29.62% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.69% | -39.49% | +31.80% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -33.12% | -39.49% | +6.37% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -44.59% | -72.17% | +27.58% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -51.30% | -80.92% | +29.62% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -15.89% | -71.68% | +55.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -29.13% | -35.36% | +6.23% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.65% | 18.70% | -16.05% |
Volatility
ASHR vs. KWEB - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF (ASHR) is 7.31%, while KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) has a volatility of 8.34%. This indicates that ASHR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KWEB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ASHR | KWEB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.31% | 8.34% | -1.03% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.95% | 20.47% | -7.52% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.88% | 27.17% | -9.29% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.01% | 47.70% | -23.69% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.09% | 40.00% | -15.91% |
ASHR vs. KWEB - Expense Ratio Comparison
ASHR has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than KWEB's 0.70% expense ratio.
Dividends
ASHR vs. KWEB - Dividend Comparison
ASHR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.10%, less than KWEB's 8.56% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF | 2.10% | 2.31% | 1.13% | 2.48% | 1.13% | 0.88% | 0.81% | 0.98% | 1.32% | 0.84% | 0.73% | 30.13% |
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF | 8.56% | 6.16% | 3.51% | 1.71% | 0.00% | 7.07% | 0.29% | 0.08% | 3.40% | 0.58% | 1.19% | 0.46% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ASHR and KWEB have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KWEB has higher volatility (8.34%) compared to ASHR (7.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASHR dropped -51.30% vs KWEB's -80.92%.
On 10-year performance, ASHR leads with 5.96% vs -0.57% for KWEB. On fees, ASHR is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, ASHR has been the lower-risk option at 7.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, ASHR has performed better with a 5.96% return vs -0.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ASHR is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for KWEB.
KWEB has the higher dividend yield at 8.56%, compared with 2.10% for ASHR.
ASHR tracks CSI 300 Index, while KWEB tracks CSI Overseas China Internet Index. They also come from different issuers: DWS and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASHR and 0.70% for KWEB.
ASHR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs -0.84), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for ASHR and KWEB
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer